<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2011 (3) TMI 307 - Punjab and Haryana High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204404</link>
    <description>Where the offence under Section 135 of the Customs Act was committed when the statutory minimum sentence was one year, and the accused had already undergone imprisonment exceeding that minimum, the Court treated the sentence already undergone as the appropriate punishment in the peculiar facts. The conviction was left undisturbed, but the custodial sentence was reduced to the period already undergone, with release directed if the person was not wanted in any other case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Jun 2011 13:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=177940" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (3) TMI 307 - Punjab and Haryana High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204404</link>
      <description>Where the offence under Section 135 of the Customs Act was committed when the statutory minimum sentence was one year, and the accused had already undergone imprisonment exceeding that minimum, the Court treated the sentence already undergone as the appropriate punishment in the peculiar facts. The conviction was left undisturbed, but the custodial sentence was reduced to the period already undergone, with release directed if the person was not wanted in any other case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204404</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>